Re: Open 7.3 items

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Open 7.3 items
Date: 2002-07-31 06:24:33
Message-ID: 3D4782A1.BEB3B916@fourpalms.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

...
> I agree that if we could quickly come to a resolution about how this
> ought to work, there's plenty of time to go off and implement it. But
> (1) we failed to come to a consensus before, so I'm not optimistic
> than one will suddenly emerge now; (2) we've got a ton of other issues
> that we *need* to deal with before beta. This one does not strike me
> as a must-fix, and so I'm loathe to spend much development time on it
> when there are so many open issues.

afaict someone else volunteered to do the work. There is no lack of
consensus that this is a useful feature, at least among those who take
responsibility to package PostgreSQL for particular platforms. How about
letting them specify the requirements and if an acceptable solution
emerges soon, we'll have it for 7.3...

- Thomas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2002-07-31 06:27:03 Re: [HACKERS] DROP COLUMN round 4
Previous Message Curt Sampson 2002-07-31 06:23:43 Re: Why is MySQL more chosen over PostgreSQL?